I have been very pessimistic about Chandrayaan-I’s prospects and I am delighted to hear ISRO say it has been successful in placing the spacecraft in lunar orbit. I have had to wonder where, precisely, my pessimism was mistaken. The answer is that I had completely left out in my thinking the vast technological progress that has taken place in telecommunications and telemetry in the last 40 years. I had surveyed the history of similar attempts by the USSR and USA in the 1960s and that was a history littered by failures of many sorts. Let aside rocket-launch failures, the other main sources of failure were in trajectories and in communications. I have been deeply concerned that India was simply going to fall in the same pitfalls along the way. But what I neglected was that our attempt was being made forty years later and the world has seen enormous technological progress during that time, especially in telecom. The Soviet and American missions took place in the early 1960s when, for example, colour television hardly existed. Today, in 2008, ISRO seems to have managed control and guidance systems that have been up to the (very complex) task of placing the spacecraft in lunar orbit. Hats off to ISRO if it turns out they have succeeded, and cheers if they actually manage to get the scientific data they have wished to receive.

The same mistake that I made here in a field not my own is what I have myself pointed out being made in a different context regarding the current world financial crisis. Viz., I said in my September 18 2008 Business Standard article “October 1929? Not!” that the world since the 1929 stock market crash had witnessed so much technological progress that the current crisis could not be compared to the one back then.

A COMPLETE HISTORY OF MANKIND’S MISSIONS TO THE MOON
Compiled from open sources by Dr Subroto Roy, c. 2006

(NOTE: These were from notes made by me prior to my August 13 2006 article in The Statesman titled “India’s Moon Mission”. I make no claim to any originality whatsoever to any of the text. As I recall, the notes were from open sources including NASA. Please email me if there are any questions about the text. They are being published today in a bit of a rush in view of Chandrayaan’s launch this morning 22 Oct 2008.)

12. Luna 3 Oct 4 1959 Successful flyby. First craft to take photos of far side of Moon. Trajectory took craft around the Moon and back, re-entered Earth’s atmosphere on Apr 20 1960.

14. Ranger 1 August 23, 1961 Failed Earth-orbit test vehicle. To test “parking orbit” around Earth to give engineers time to calculate accurate trajectory to follow to Moon. Made it to low Earth orbit, then engines, which were supposed to re-ignite after 13 minutes and burn for 90 seconds, burned for a few seconds only and shut off. Re-entered Earth’s atmosphere after 111 orbits.

17. Ranger 4 April 23, 1962Failed lunar lander. Lunar impact: April 26, 1962 On board communication failure; ground control could track it until it crashed on far side of the Moon but unable to collect any data.

18. Ranger 5 Failed lunar lander. October 18, 1962 Solar cell failed shortly after launch. Without power, engineers unable to control the spacecraft and it missed the Moon by 720 kilometers.

20. Luna 4 Failed lunar orbiter. April 2, 1963 Contact lost after it passed within 9,300 kilometers of the Moon.

22. Ranger 7 Successful lunar impactor . July 28, 1964 Lunar impact: July 31, 1964 Sent back first high-quality images of lunar surface, more than 4,300 images, before crash-landing in Sea of Clouds.

23. Ranger 8 Successful lunar impactor. Launch: February 17, 1965 Lunar impact: February 20, 1965 Took more than 7,100 high-quality images of the lunar surface before crash-landing in Sea of Tranquility

24. Ranger 9 Successful lunar impactor. Launch: March 21, 1965 Ranger 9 took more than 5,800 images of the lunar surface before it crash-landed in the crater Alphonsus. Network television broadcast images from the spacecraft as they were received — live from the Moon!

26. Luna 6 – Failed lunar lander. Launch: June 8, 1965 On its way to the Moon, a rocket failed to turn off after a trajectory correction, so missed Moon and went into solar orbit.

27. Zond 3 Successful lunar flyby. Launch: July 18, 1965 Took 25 images as it flew by the far side of the Moon and transmitted them back to Earth nine days later. After passing the Moon, the spacecraft went into a solar orbit.

28. Luna 7 Failed lunar lander. Launch: October 4, 1965 Lunar impact: October 7, 1965 Luna 7 made it to the Moon, but its retrorockets switched on too soon. The spacecraft crash-landed in the Ocean of Storms, west of the crater Kepler.

29. Luna 8 Failed lunar lander. Launch: December 3, 1965 Lunar impact: December 6, 1965 Luna 8 made it to the Moon, but its retrorockets fired too late and the spacecraft crash-landed in the Ocean of Storms, east of the crater Galilei.

30. Luna 9 Successful lunar lander. Launch: Jan. 31, 1966 Lunar landing: February 3, 1966 First to make controlled landing onto surface of another celestial body. Landed on sloping floor of shallow crater at 7.08 N, Longitude 295.63 E, within Oceanus Procellarum. Over the next two days, the spacecraft sent three panoramas of lunar landscape. During the second and third transmission, it shifted a few centimeters, and third set of images taken from a slightly different angle, allowing scientists to construct a stereoscopic view of the landing site and determine the distances to various rocks and depressions. Last communication with the spacecraft was on February 5, 1966.

31. Cosmos 111 Failed lunar flyby. March 1, 1966 The spacecraft was unable to achieve a lunar trajectory. It re-entered Earth’s atmosphere on March 3, 1966.

32. Luna 10 Successful lunar orbiter. Launch: March 31, 1966 Lunar orbit insertion: April 2, 1966. First spacecraft to orbit around another celestial body. Studied radiation levels and cosmic ray intensities and took readings of the Moon’s weak magnetic field. Transmitted data for two months, circling the Moon 460 times before mission ended May 30, 1966.

33. Surveyor 1 – Successful lunar lander. Launch: May 30, 1966 controlled landing on the surface of the Moon, at 2.45 S, 316.79 E. Surveyor 1 took more than 11,100 images of the lunar landscape during its 6-week mission.

34. Lunar Orbiter 1 Successful lunar orbiter. Launch: August 10, 1966 Sent back high-quality TV images of a vast area of lunar surface, including first detailed images of potential Apollo landing sites. After circling Moon 527 times in 77 days, ground control deliberately crashed the craft onto the Moon’s surface, so it would not represent a hazard to upcoming manned missions.

35. Luna 11 Successful lunar orbiter. Launch: August 24, 1966 Lunar orbit insertion: August 27, 1966 Designed to test new technology, completed 277 orbits before its mission was terminated on October 1, 1966.

36. Surveyor 2 Failed lunar lander. Launch: September 20, 1966 Lunar impact: September 22, 1966 Just before touchdown, one of Surveyor 2’s thrusters malfunctioned, and spacecraft tumbled out of control. Crashed into the Moon southeast of the crater Copernicus.

37. Luna 12 Successful lunar orbiter. Launch: October 22, 1966 Lunar orbit insertion: October 25, 1966 took 1,100 pictures of the Moon, including images of the Sea of Rains and area surrounding the crater Aristarchus. The mission was terminated on January 19 1967 after 602 orbits.

38. Lunar Orbiter 2 Successful lunar orbiter. Launch: November 6, 1966 Lunar orbit insertion: November 6, 1966 Lunar impact: October 11, 1967 Took more than 800 pictures including an oblique view of the crater Copernicus. Was deliberately sent crashing into the lunar surface on October 11, 1967,

39. Luna 13 Successful lunar lander. Launch: December 21, 1966 Lunar landing: December 24, 1966 bounced to a landing on the lunar surface, coming to a rest in the Ocean of Storms (Oceanus Procellarum) at 18.87 N, 297.95 E, between the craters Selencus and Craft. The lander collected soil samples and conducted experiments to determine the soil density and radioactivity. The mission ended on December 30, 1966, when the spacecraft’s supplies were depleted.

40. Lunar Orbiter 3 Successful lunar orbiter. Launch: February 4, 1967 Lunar orbit insertion: February 8, 1967. The orbit was altered several times to give controllers on Earth more experience with communications; was able to photograph Surveyor 2 on the surface. Mission ended on October 9, 1967, when controllers deliberately crashed the spacecraft into the Moon.

41. Surveyor 3 Successful lunar lander. Launch: April 17, 1967 Lunar landing: April 20, 1967 As it came in for a soft landing, one thruster did not turn off properly, as a result spacecraft bounced before coming to rest in Ocean of Storms (Oceanus Procellarum), at 3.01 S, 336.66 E. A scoop was used to collect soil samples, and a camera took more than 6,300 images.

42. Lunar Orbiter 4 Successful lunar orbiter. Launch: May 4, 1967 Lunar orbit insertion: May 8, 1967 Lunar Orbiter 4 was the first to take pictures of the Moon’s south pole. It took images from orbit for 8 months before controllers deliberately crashed the spacecraft into the Moon.

43. Surveyor 4 Failed lunar lander. Launch: July 14, 1967 Controllers lost contact with Surveyor 4 just two and a half minutes before it was to touch down in Sinus Medii.

44. Lunar Orbiter 5 Successful lunar orbiter. Launch: August 1, 1967 Lunar orbit insertion: August 5, 1967. With this, more than 99% of the Moon’s surface had been mapped by the Lunar Orbiter spacecraft. Ended when controllers sent spacecraft crashing into the lunar surface on January 31, 1968.

45. Surveyor 5 Successful lunar lander. Launch: September 8, 1967 Lunar landing: September 10, 1967 Despite a helium leak that occurred during its trip to the Moon, controllers were able to bring Surveyor 5 to a successful landing in the Sea of Tranquillity (Mare Tranquillitatis), at 1.41 N, 23.18 E. Controllers ordered the spacecraft to fire its engine to test composition of the soil beneath the lander. The test firing blew away a few clumps of soil but did not create a crater. Final transmission received on December 17, 1967.

46. Surveyor 6 Successful lunar lander. Launch: November 7, 1967 Lunar landing: November 9, 1967 Touched down in Sinus Medii, at 0.49 N, 358.60 E. Once on surface, took a series of pictures and soil samples. On November 17, controllers ordered the spacecraft’s engines to fire, lifting Surveyor 6 off the lunar surface 3 meters (10 feet) and setting it down again a few feet from the original landing site. The spacecraft then took pictures of the former landing site, checking for evidence of a crater created by the rocket’s exhaust. No crater was found, indicating the Moon’s surface was solid enough to support a manned landing. Last contact on Dec 14, 1967.

47. Surveyor 7 Successful lunar lander. Launch: January 7, 1968 Lunar landing: January 9, 1968 Landed in the lunar highlands, near the north rim of the crater Tycho, at 40.86 S, Longitude 348.53 E. Scientists used the scoop on the spacecraft to weigh lunar rocks, based on how much current was needed to lift each rock. Images sent back indicated, for the first time, that some lunar rocks had been molten at some time in their history. Mission successfully completed on February 21, 1968.

49. Zond 5 Successful lunar flyby and back. Launch: September 15, 1968 Zond 5 left Earth orbit, flew around the Moon and returned to our planet, splashing down in the Indian Ocean. The spacecraft was recovered and taken back to the USSR for study. Not much information was released but many believed Zond 5 was one of the last steps before the USSR was to land cosmonauts on the Moon.

50. Zond 6 Successful lunar flyby and back. Launch: November 10, 1968 Zond 6 may have been the USSR’s final test before launching cosmonauts to the Moon. Once the spacecraft left Earth orbit, it took 2 days to reach the Moon. There, it took pictures as it swung close to the surface. Zond 6 then returned to Earth, parachuting to a landing within Soviet territory.

51. Apollo 8 Successful manned lunar orbit Launch: December 21, 1968 Lunar orbit insertion: December 24, 1968 Astronauts Frank Borman, James Lovell, and William Anders first humans to leave Earth and travel to the Moon. They arrived at the Moon, completed 10 orbits, and returned to Earth on December 27, 1968. Live TV images broadcast from the trip included an iconic image of Earth rising over the lunar horizon.

52. Zond 1969A Failed lunar flyby and return craft. Launch: January 20, 1969 The launch vehicle’s second stage shut down early and the spacecraft failed to achieve Earth orbit.

56. Apollo 10 – Successful manned lunar orbiter. Launch: May 18, 1969 Lunar orbit insertion: May 21 1969 Astronauts Thomas Stafford, John Young, and Eugene Cernan went into lunar orbit, where they tested procedures for the first moon landing. Apollo 10 splashed down in the Pacific Ocean on May 26, 1969.

58. Luna 15 Failed lunar sample return. Launch: July 13, 1969 Was launched in a veil of secrecy only three days before Apollo 11. The USSR did not reveal the target or mission of Luna 15 causing concern on the part of the USA. Would Luna 15’s mission interfere with Apollo 11? Where would it land? Would there be communication interference? Just two hours before the liftoff of Apollo 11, Luna 15 began its descent to the surface in the Sea of Crisis. The spacecraft crash landed on the lunar surface.

59. Apollo 11 Successful first manned lunar landing. Launch: July 16, 1969 Lunar landing: July 20, 1969 While astronaut Michael Collins orbited overhead, Neil Armstrong and Edwin “Buzz” Aldrin became first humans to land on the Moon, within the Sea of Tranquillity. Remained on the lunar surface for more than 21 hours and collected 20 kilograms (44 pounds) of samples. Apollo 11 returned to Earth on July 24, 1969, splashing down in the Pacific Ocean.

60. Zond 7 Successful lunar flyby and back. Launch: August 7, 1969 Lunar landing August 14, 1969 Zond 7 flew to the Moon and back, taking colour pictures of the Earth and lunar surface along the way. Soft-landed in Kazakhstan.

63. Apollo 12 Successful manned lunar landing. Launch: November 14, 1969 Lunar landing: November 19, 1969 While astronaut Richard Gordon orbited overhead, Charles Conrad and Alan Bean landed on the Moon. Apollo 12 touched down in the Ocean of Storms, within walking distance of Surveyor 3. The astronauts were on the lunar surface for 31.5 hours and collected 34 kilograms (75 pounds) of samples. They returned to Earth on November 24.

64. Apollo 13 Failed manned lunar landing Launch: April 11, 1970 When Apollo 13 was halfway to the Moon, an explosion in the spacecraft’s Service Module required mission control to cancel the scheduled Moon landing and focus on bringing astronauts James Lovell, Fred Haise, and John Swigert safely home which they did.

65. Luna 16 Successful lunar sample return Launch: September 12, 1970 Lunar landing: September 20, 1970 First robotic mission to land on the Moon, collect samples of dust and rock, and return those samples to Earth. Also the first spacecraft to land in lunar darkness. Landed in the Sea of Fertility (Mare Fecunditatis) at 0.68 S, 56.30 E. After collecting dust and rock samples, the spacecraft was launched back into space 26 hours later. Returned to Earth on September 24 with a soft landing, bringing back 101 grams (3.5 ounces) of Moon rocks.

68. Apollo 15 Successful manned lunar landing Launch: July 26, 1971 Lunar landing: July 30, 1971 While astronaut Alfred Worden orbited overhead, David Scott and James Irwin landed on the Moon in the Hadley Rille region. Apollo 15 was the first lander to carry a rover. Astronauts drove rover almost 28 kilometers and were on the lunar surface for almost 67 hours and collected 77 kilograms of samples before returning to Earth on August 7.

69. Luna 18 Failed lunar landing Launch: September 2, 1971 Lunar orbit insertion: September 7, 1971 After completing 54 orbits of the Moon, the spacecraft fired its braking thrusters and began its descent to the lunar surface. Communications were lost upon landing.

71. Luna 20 Successful lunar sample return Launch: February 14, 1972 Lunar landing: February 21, 1972 Luna 20 soft-landed in the Apollonius highlands near Sea of Fertility. Collected samples and then lifted off the next day. The sealed capsule, containing 30 grams of lunar rocks and dust, landed in the USSR on February 25 and was retrieved the following day.

72. Apollo 16 Successful manned lunar landing Launch: April 16, 1972 Lunar landing: April 21, 1972. While astronaut Thomas Mattingly orbited overhead, John Young and Charles Duke landed in the Descartes region on the Moon. Apollo 16 carried a lunar rover that astronauts drove 27 kilometers They were on the lunar surface for 71 hours and collected almost 95 kilograms of samples before returning to Earth on April 27.

73. Soyuz L3 Failure lunar orbiter and test vehicle Launch: November 23, 1972 Was designed to test a capsule that was to function as the base for a lunar lander. Just 90 seconds after launch, 6 of the 30 engines shut down, triggering a catastrophic failure of the launch vehicle.

74. Apollo 17 – Launch: December 7, 1972 Lunar landing: December 11, 1972 Successful manned lunar landing. While astronaut Ronald Evans orbited overhead, Eugene Cernan and Harrison Schmitt landed in the Taurus-Littrow region on the Moon. Schmitt was the first geologist to land on the Moon. Cernan and Schmitt drove 30 kilometers in their lunar rover, collected 110 kilograms of samples, and spent 75 hours on the lunar surface before returning to Earth on December 19. Apollo 17 was the last human landing on the Moon — or any other place in the solar system.

75. Luna 21/Lunokhod 2 – Launch: January. 8, 1973 Lunar landing: January 15, 1973 Successful lunar rover. The rover first took a panoramic shot of the landing site, before it rolled off of its protective shell and onto the lunar surface. The rover was powered by solar panels and kept warm at night by a radioactive heat source. The mission lasted 4 months (4 lunar days), during which it took more than 80,000 television pictures and travelled 37km.

77. Luna 23 – Oct 28, 1974Failed lunar sample return :damaged during its moon landing on November 6, 1974 and was unable to collect samples. transmitted data for 3 days before falling silent.

79. Hiten – (Muses-A)Jan 24 1990Successful lunar trajectory test launched into highly elliptical Earth orbit that took it past the Moon 10 times. It released Hagoromo, a small spacecraft that was to go into lunar orbit, but its transmitter failed before it reached the Moon. The Japanese used Hiten to test various technologies for future lunar missions. The spacecraft was intentionally crashed into the moon on April 10, 1993.

80. Clementine – April 25, 1994 Successful lunar orbiter; failed asteroid rendezvous spacecraft flew by Earth twice during the first month of its mission before going into orbit around the Moon. Once in lunar orbit, Clementine began its primary 70-day mapping mission. Then entered a circumlunar orbit and was to have flown on to an encounter with the asteroid Geographos in July 1994. But a malfunctioning thruster depleted all manoeuvering fuel and the spacecraft was stuck in Earth orbit. It lost power in June 1994, after studying the Van Allen radiation belts.

81. Lunar Prospector – Launch: January 7, 1998 Successful lunar orbiter designed to go into a low polar orbit around the Moon search for water ice and other minerals in permanently shadowed polar craters. During its 19-month mission, Lunar Prospector completed a map of the Moon’s surface composition. On July 31, 1999, mission controllers crashed the spacecraft into a crater near the south pole. Observers from Earth watched for any signs of water vapor that might have been released during the impact, but none was seen.

83. SELENE 2007 ?

84. Chang’e 1 2007?

85. Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter 2008?

?86. Chandrayaan-1 –Lunar orbiter, Launched October 22 2008.

Shri G Madhavan Nair, Padma Bhushan, Chairman, ISRO

Dear Sir,

Warm congratulations on the successful launch of the PSLV rocket this morning carrying the Chandrayaan-1 spacecraft atop it. As an Indian citizen, I trust all the plans announced by yourself and your colleagues over the last few years shall succeed in this complex endeavour.

In an article “India’s Moon Mission” published in the Editorial Page of The Statesman on August 13 2006, I had expressed the hope of seeing from ISRO a thorough technical survey of all of mankind’s attempts at the Moon from which our Mission could have learnt appropriate lessons. No such survey was apparently done, and hence I am enclosing below a brief survey from open sources, compiled by a lay citizen such as myself. This may be found helpful by your teams in placing our Mission in appropriate historical, scientific and technological context.

Author’s Note, December 28 2008: This post of mine has been superceded ex post facto by the following text:

Chandrayaan adds a little good cheer! Well done, ISRO!

December 28, 2008 — drsubrotoroy

The news that Chandrayaan-I has sent back scientific data as intended is excellent. ISRO has my warm congratulations at last! Iron is apparently very abundant in lunar rock so discovering it is not revolutionary but even so, the fact India has a successful lunar orbiter which is sending back signals and scientific data is simply delightful. It brings good cheer in a season marred by the Mumbai massacres and the clouds of war.

On November 9 2008, I had incidentally diagnosed the basis of my own earlier pessimism about Chandrayaan as follows, reproduced here again:“I have been very pessimistic about Chandrayaan-I’s prospects and I am delighted to hear ISRO say it has been successful in placing the spacecraft in lunar orbit. I have had to wonder where, precisely, my pessimism was mistaken. The answer is that I had completely left out in my thinking the vast technological progress that has taken place in telecommunications and telemetry in the last 40 years. I had surveyed the history of similar attempts by the USSR and USA in the 1960s and that was a history littered by failures of many sorts. Let aside rocket-launch failures, the other main sources of failure were in trajectories and in communications. I have been deeply concerned that India was simply going to fall in the same pitfalls along the way. But what I neglected was that our attempt was being made forty years later and the world has seen enormous technological progress during that time, especially in telecom. The Soviet and American missions took place in the early 1960s when, for example, colour television hardly existed. Today, in 2008, ISRO seems to have managed control and guidance systems that have been up to the (very complex) task of placing the spacecraft in lunar orbit. Hats off to ISRO if it turns out they have succeeded, and cheers if they actually manage to get the scientific data they have wished to receive.

The same mistake that I made here in a field not my own is what I have myself pointed out being made in a different context regarding the current world financial crisis. Viz., I said in my September 18 2008 Business Standard article “October 1929? Not!” that the world since the 1929 stock market crash had witnessed so much technological progress that the current crisis could not be compared to the one back then.”

Hats off to all at ISRO!

Subroto Roy

The original text was as follows:

Chandrayaan-1 had not completed a single “parking orbit” around Earth (in fact had just reached the atmosphere above Indonesia) before a dozen scientific bureaucrats at ISRO were pouring forth self-congratulations in front of TV cameras — and Indian television news media, including the privately-owned NDTV, were proclaiming “Moon Mission Successful”!

Hello, hello, ISRO and Indian journalists: all of you need a serious reality-check!

Of course India has put satellites into terrestrial space which has been wonderful for telecommunications etc.

No one should want to contribute, after all, to what might still be seen as a large and expensive Government of India publicity/propaganda stunt. Remember that credibility is all important to the good scientist. (Just because New Delhi may be delusional does not mean all-India needs to be so as well.)

of our Moon rocket leaving earth orbit successfully is 20:1 against,
of it reaching the moon’s vicinity about 50:1 against,
of it entering lunar orbit successfully about 100:1 against,
and of it transmitting half the data it is intended to about 200:1 against.

Going to the Moon requires a spacecraft reach an “escape” velocity of some 40,000 km per hour. After some 324,000 km, the craft escapes Earth’s gravity and comes to a “standstill” or “neutral” point, a fictional station on the Earth-Moon axis, still some 32,000 km (about 19 Moon radii) away from the Moon. The Moon’s gravity then gradually takes over, drawing the spacecraft faster and faster towards the Moon, to either land on its surface or go into orbit around it, though to avoid a fatal impact crashing into the Moon, the spacecraft may require retrorockets to slow itself down.

All Indians will be delighted if the Moon-launch tomorrow is successful. At the same time, all Indians, especially millions of wide-eyed children, will be more than disappointed if ISRO’s plans fail through avoidable error. It was of the highest national importance to try to ensure beforehand that the Indian mission succeeded if it is going to be tried at all. That has not taken place.

The numerous sources of possible failure include

(A) launch-failure causing the spacecraft to never reach, let aside exit from, terrestrial space onto a path to the Moon, all through belts of intense heat and radiation;

(B) trajectory-failure causing the spacecraft to move wrongly through cislunar and translunar space, miss the Moon and go into solar orbit like everything else in the solar system;

(C) failing to enter lunar orbit, crashing into the Moon instead;

(D) failing to transmit intended data from lunar orbit.

Only if all these and more are avoided, can ISRO’s Moon mission be considered successful.

Here are some questions the PM and his Government needed to answer before the liftoff but failed to do so:

1. Is there an indigenous rocket powerful enough for a spacecraft to reach 40,000 kmph, the escape-velocity from Earth’s gravity? If a foreign rocket is being used in whole or in part, what are the terms of collaboration?

2. India’s will be mankind’s 85th mission to the Moon on record and there was a vast amount of publicly available knowledge already gained in other countries; did ISRO do a survey of all previous Moon missions by other countries, especially the USSR and USA since 1957 to investigate and analyse the numerous errors and failures they made? If not, why did it not do so ? If we did absorb all existing lessons available, and there are people at ISRO wholly conversant with what went wrong with every case of launch-failure, trajectory-failure, instrumentation-failure causing spacecraft to fail to reach or leave Earth orbit, or miss the Moon, or fail to communicate etc, what identifiable improvements did this learning cause in our Mission-planning? The cause of nationalism is not served if we repeat the known mistakes of others; why were we made to feel so confident we were not headed to be making the same mistakes as had been already made by others?

3. It is a blow to national prestige and self-confidence if there is failure at any stage of this difficult enterprise and it may have been better to do the job in discrete and successful stages or not do it at all than fail at it most spectacularly; was any thought given to breaking down the present aim into several stages – e.g., improving rocketry to aim at a “parking orbit” around Earth permitting ground control to better calculate trajectories to the Moon, then to flyby the Moon, then to attempt to go into lunar orbit? Why are scientific payloads being planned to be carried even before we have gained any experience in successful rocketry through terrestrial, cislunar, translunar and lunar space?

4. Our country has not been a major manufacturer of engines, aircraft bodies, computers or communications and imaging equipment, all vital to this enterprise; did we import the components to be used and if so, which ones?

5. Science is universal, and belongs to all mankind; all mundane international disputes appear petty when seen from selenocentric space which is the one good reason to want to try to reach it; why not release into the public domain for scrutiny by everyone in the country and the world the equations involved in the rocketry, and even whether Newtonian or Einsteinian frames of reference are being used?

If India’s Moon project planned for September 2007 is successful, it will be something for everyone to cheer loudly about. The Moon is Earth’s single important natural satellite, and as planetary moons go, it is unusually large in size compared to Earth. Our five-stage PSLV rocket is planned to place a scientific satellite around it. In token political gestures, NASA and the Europeans may provide scientific payloads too.

The central question is whether the Indian satellite now being built will ever succeed in reaching lunar orbit ~ an immensely complex task which deserves to be urgently reconsidered. It is of the highest national importance to try to ensure beforehand that our mission succeeds if it is going to be tried at all.

Yet neither our much-vaunted scientific establishment nor our political decision-makers have any sense of urgency about it. Let it be clearly said it will be simply not good enough this time for the Government of India’s scientists, bureaucrats and politicians to shrug off failures as they have been prone to do by saying, “Oh, we’ll do better next time”. Wasteful expenditure of public resources (paid for by endless deficit finance in an inconvertible currency) is common across all government departments, but in this most dramatic of missions, the hopes and aspirations of one thousand million Indians, and especially hundreds of millions of wide-eyed children, will become focussed on the launch. It will be a severe blow to national prestige, morale and self-confidence, as well as a display of scientific and technological incompetence, if there is failure at any stage of this difficult enterprise.

Indeed, it would be better to do the job in discrete and successful stages or not do it at all than to fail at it most spectacularly.

All Indians need to and can come to know what is involved. A trip to the Moon requires a spacecraft reach an “escape” velocity of some 40,000 km per hour. At a distance of some 324,000 km, the spacecraft escapes Earth’s gravity and comes to a “standstill” or “neutral” point, a fictional station on the Earth-Moon axis, still some 32,000 km (or about 19 Moon radii) from the Moon. The Moon’s gravity then gradually takes over, drawing the spacecraft faster and faster towards the Moon, to either land on its surface or go into orbit around it ~ though to avoid a fatal impact crashing into the Moon, the spacecraft may require retrorockets to slow itself down.

The numerous sources of possible failure include (a) launch-failure causing the spacecraft to never reach let aside exit from terrestrial space onto a path to the Moon, all through belts of intense heat and radiation; (b) trajectory-failure causing the spacecraft to move wrongly through cislunar and translunar space, miss the Moon and go into solar orbit like everything else; (c) failing to enter lunar orbit, crashing into the Moon instead; (d) failing to transmit intended data. Only if all these and more are avoided, can our Moon mission as presently defined be considered successful.

India’s mission will be mankind’s 85th to the Moon on record. There is a vast amount of knowledge already gained in other countries, almost all of which is publicly available. The era of international competitions in space-research and exploration started between Russia and America half a century ago and it ended after the Cold War. Since the 1980s, the two space superpowers changed emphasis away from the Moon, towards creating re-usable vehicles like the Shuttle and permanent space-stations, unmanned probes to Earth’s planetary neighbours, as well as major space-telescopes which now provide unprecedented visions of the galaxy we inhabit. Now there has been new interest in the Moon again, and there have been successful American, European and Japanese missions recently. Even if our Moon mission succeeds, we will be placed technologically at a point still 40 years behind the world’s leaders in space exploration, and it would be self-delusion to think we lead in space research in any way whatsoever.

Indeed such a realisation is cause for sober reflection and critical questions. Late-starting space missions like the Europeans and Japanese, have all intelligently absorbed the lessons from the Russian and American projects. Has India done so?

Have our space scientists absorbed into their work for the Moon mission next year all the existing lessons available? Are there people at ISRO wholly conversant with what went wrong with every case of launch-failure, trajectory-failure, instrumentation-failure etc causing spacecraft to fail to reach or leave Earth orbit, or to miss the Moon, or fail to communicate etc? If so, have all those lessons been absorbed into our mission’s planning? If not, why not? Can we be assured now that we are not headed to be making the same mistakes as have been already made by others? It is not the cause of nationalism but the cause of unwisdom which shall be served if we repeat the known mistakes of others.

We are fond of saying our space programme is low in costs, and indeed it is when compared internationally. But there are always domestic opportunity costs, and there may be much better and more cost-effective ways of creating a scientifically-minded population in India. E.g., all of astrology assumes a geocentric Ptolomaic solar system — a fierce Government-led all-India campaign against astrology, and promotion instead of the heliocentric Copernican solar system, may do much more for the cause of rationality and basic scientific education in the country today than a failed Moon mission. After all, we still have purported physicists and directors of national technological institutes who are astrology-believers!

The Government of India’s scientists, bureaucrats and politicians must become wholly candid and transparent with the public whose resources they are spending about the exact significance of our Moon project, the risks of failure, and how these are being addressed. So far that has not been done. Little more than a year away from the launch, all we seem to have in the public domain are pious hopes being expressed and a wish-list of what scientific results might be like once the spacecraft is in lunar orbit. The real question is whether our satellite will succeed in reaching lunar orbit at all.

Indeed the present aim may be far too ambitious for 2007, and may need to be broken down into several stages. E.g. improving rocketry first to aim at a “parking orbit” around Earth permitting ground control to better calculate trajectories to the Moon, then to flyby the Moon, then to attempt to go into lunar orbit.

It may be wise to postpone carrying scientific payloads until much more experience has been successfully gained in rocketry through terrestrial, cislunar, translunar and lunar space. We should also bear in mind we have not been major manufacturers of engines, aircraft bodies, computers or communications and imaging equipment ~ all of which are vital to this enterprise.

Furthermore, let all the equations involved in the rocketry, and even whether Newtonian or Einsteinian frames of reference are being used, be released into the public domain for scrutiny by everyone in the country and the world. If someone says this will benefit the Pakistanis, the intelligent political response would be to invite the Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, Sri Lankans, Malaysians, Singaporeans Indonesians and our other neighbours to join our mission. Science is universal, and belongs to all mankind. All mundane disputes appear petty when seen from selenocentric space ~ which is the one good reason to want to try to reach it.

Follow me on Twitter

Search Engine, “Fair Use”, Twitter

The search engine above should locate any article by its title; the Index and Archives may be used as well.
Readers are welcome to quote from my work under the normal “fair use” rule, but please try to quote me by name and indicate the place of original publication in case of work being republished here. I am at Twitter @subyroy, see my latest tweets above